On Sat, Mar 31, 2007 at 07:16:19PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > >> It's important to get the *right* interface into the first release
> > >> that has it.
> > >>
> > >
> > > Agreed, that's why I proposed the right interface to begin with
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> It's important to get the *right* interface into the first release
>> that has it.
> Agreed, that's why I proposed the right interface to begin with :-)
I don't necessarily object to PQexecf() as a shortcut for some
multi-step operation, but I don't think you've g
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >> It's important to get the *right* interface into the first release
> >> that has it.
> >>
> >
> > Agreed, that's why I proposed the right interface to begin with :-)
> >
>
> Maybe the first thing we might usefully do would be to document
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's important to get the *right* interface into the first release
that has it.
Agreed, that's why I proposed the right interface to begin with :-)
Maybe the first thing we might usefully do would be to document
PQExpBuffer. And you can send in a patch for t
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > I note that the nominal schedule
> > http://www.postgresql.org/developer/roadmap
> > says that all major proposals should have been made and reviewed at
> > least a month ago.
>
>
> Consider me spanked... (and quit giggling Bruce).
Awe, you got me. :-)
FYI, I sun
> It's important to get the *right* interface into the first release
> that has it.
Agreed, that's why I proposed the right interface to begin with :-)
> The day before feature freeze is way too late for
> blue-sky design IMHO.
Ok, I can certainly bring this up again in the next release cyc
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 2) It's important to get the interface into a near-future release so
> that client applications can start using it soon.
It's important to get the *right* interface into the first release
that has it. The day before feature freeze is way too late for
blue-sky design
> Way too late for 8.3 --- if we were going to do something like this,
> we should think first and program later. In particular, blindly
> adopting the sprintf format string definition doesn't seem very helpful.
> The sorts of escapes I'd want to have are "properly quoted SQL
> identifier", "prope
